Look What’s Missing From The Draft Auckland Plan

16 March 2018: We let you know recently that historic heritage is not mentioned in the new draft Auckland Plan that is out for consultation until March 28th. Here is your chance to have your say about how important heritage is for Auckland.. Just follow the instructions below. You might want to print this email out so you can follow it while you are filling in the form. You can copy and paste the text we have provided and it is also a good idea to add some comments of your own to make each submission individual.

Step-by-step guide for submission on lack of heritage in Draft Auckland Plan 2050

There is a lot of information on this page about both the 10 Year Budget and the draft Auckland Plan 2050 overview. You can read through it here, and at the bottom of the page there is a link to the full Auckland Plan documents.

Click the blue “Have your say now” button, just below the Have Your Say title picture on the right.

This will take you to the online feedback form, which is the same as the hard copy available at city libraries, and also in the centre of the March Our Auckland magazine.

The feedback form allows you to give feedback on both the 10 Year Budget and the Auckland Plan 2050 – all questions are optional.

Regarding the lack of heritage in the draft Auckland Plan 2050, the Character Coalition is most concerned about:

Outcome 5: Protecting and Enhancing our Environment. This is on pages 20-21 in the overview document, and this is the link in the full plan document:

There is a complete lack of any mention of historic built heritage in either the overview document, or the full draft Plan. If historic heritage is considered part of cultural heritage, this should be clearly stated in both the overview and the full Plan.

Because there is no reference to historic heritage it looks to the public that this is of no consideration or interest to Auckland Council. Historic heritage is an intrinsic part of the Auckland environment and this should be clearly stated.

Focus Area 4 should be amended to “Protect Auckland’s significant environments, cultural and historic heritage from further loss”.

Question 8: Do you have any other feedback on the Auckland Plan 2050?

Here is some sample text to use:

The first Auckland Plan released in 2012 had an entire chapter outlining the importance and value of historic heritage, with strategic direction statements, key priorities and targets to “protect and conserve Auckland’s historic heritage for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations”.

This 2012 text should be incorporated into Outcome 5: Protecting and Enhancing our Environment, in the Auckland Plan 2050.

Text in this outcome must include a definite statement about the importance and value of historic heritage, and specifically that it is included in Focus Area 4, to read “Protect Auckland’s significant environments, and cultural and historic heritage from further loss”.

Then click next and you will have completed the feedback.

Please share this email with the members of your group so that we get as many people submitting as possible. This is our only chance of making sure historic heritage is not completely left out of the new Auckland Plan.

Consultation closes at 8pm on 28th March so please do this now.

Built Heritage Written Out of New Draft Auckland Plan

05 March 2018: The refreshed Auckland Plan for the next 30 years reveals what heritage groups have long been up against in the region – just when you think gains have been made and you’ve won a round, the planners mount a fresh attack.

The new Draft Plan was released last week, with built and historic heritage totally absent from both the overview and the full draft.

The first Auckland Plan, released in 2012, had an entire chapter of 14 pages on Historic Heritage, a big win for Auckland’s community groups which applied pressure during extensive feedback sessions and demanded that heritage be appropriately recognised.

Now we need to fight for it all again. The Draft Plan only talks about environmental and cultural heritage as types of heritage, and a definition of cultural heritage includes no recognition of built heritage at all.

Please alert your networksto the vital importance of making a submission on the Auckland Plan 2050. Submissions close on Wednesday, March 28th.

We will send another letter very soon giving instructions on where to do this online, along with some suitable text to use.

Many people will also get the paper questionnaire in the March edition of the Council’s Our Auckland magazine.

Character Coalition: because Character Counts

The Character Coalition is an umbrella group representing heritage, historical and special interest groups and residents associations who care deeply about their city.

We have joined together out of a sense of frustration that the community is not being listened to. We have watched with despair as precious buildings and areas have been destroyed to make way for, often inappropriate, new developments. We have felt shut out of the decision-making process that determines development in our local environments, a process that seems designed to disempower ordinary citizens.

Auckland Council accused of hijacking Unitary Plan

The Auckland Council is being accused of hijacking the planned blueprint for the city's development by sneaking through housing density changes. After four years in the making, the 30-year Unitary Plan for Auckland's future is due to be considered by an independent panel next year.

Auckland Council’s push to protect pre-1944 houses ‘unnecessary’

Auckland residents say they feel deflated and ignored after the rejection of a council proposal to protect character housing areas built before 1944. Listen to it here;

Character Coalition Auckland Unitary Plan Submission

The Character Coalition has joined forces with Auckland 2040

The Character Coalition has joined forces with Auckland 2040 in calling on the Council to rethink the Unitary Plan.

We do not oppose change or growth. We know there will need to be intensification but this plan has been done the wrong way around. A bottom up process would have engaged people at the beginning of the discussions and led to widespread buy in.

If people feel they have had a say and been listened to they are more willing to accept change. The Council must listen to this ground swell and use it as an opportunity to get a better result not dig in and refuse to make the changes being called for.